The principles of refreshing proposed by prior-art techniques are based on access, either unified or through “proprietary” software, to a storage space from which the device will draw data to be rendered (mainly photographs, in the case of digital frames). The techniques proposed therefore frequently consist of the shifting, within the user's network, of the storage space accessible to the frame. In order that the new storage location may be used, it is unfortunately often necessary for another of the user's devices to remain powered on as well. Indeed, in order that the device, for example a frame, may be able to access the storage space through its wireless connection, it is necessary for this storage space to be permanently available to this frame. This very often means that the user's personal computer, which constitutes this storage space, will be permanently powered on.
Other techniques, especially based on address translation, enable such rendering devices to access a storage space situated on a specific server through the Internet. These mechanisms are based on a complex parametrizing of the device. Indeed, to enable the device to access the remote storage space, the user must enter a URL (Universal Resource Locator) as well as at least one identifier and one password in this device. The rendering device is then able to link up by itself to the storage space and render the data stored therein.
These techniques have several drawbacks, among them the complexity of parametrizing the rendering device, which leads to an almost routine rejection on the part of the users. Indeed, for the user who is normally informed of these technologies, the fact of making numerous entries causes the configuration phases to be even more tedious. Furthermore, in the event of a malfunction or a resetting of the devices, a user who has not taken the trouble to preserve the parameters in order to re-enter them is forced to re-create his account or else login to online services in order to retrieve his identifiers. This is always a source of difficulty.
Another drawback of these prior-art techniques is related to the fact that the entry operations made by the users are not secured. Thus, the user can be subjected to attacks designed to retrieve his passwords or his identifiers through these devices.
Yet another drawback of these prior-art techniques relates to the feeding of the storage space. Indeed, when this storage space is situated in the user's network, the feeding is done through the addition of contents, often manually, following the emptying of a memory card of the camera for example. When the storage space is situated in a remote server, the feeding of data is done by the loading, from an Internet browser, of the contents in the user's possession from his personal computer. There are therefore several steps in addition to that of emptying the memory card, including the tedious and difficult steps of selection and loading.
Furthermore, the interesting feature of these online storage spaces is the fact that they enable other users, with whom the user possessing the rendering device is in contact, to perform their own loading operations in order that the user of the device might derive benefit from them. Now, prior to these loading operations, the other users must obtain identification codes from the user of the device, enabling them to load the contents that they wish to download. Again, these codes are easily lost or forgotten and, owing to the complexity of the operations needed, the users cannot or will not wish to provide the user of the device with fresh contents.
Another drawback of these prior-art mechanisms is that the online services are provided mainly by the manufacturers of said rendering devices. This means that the permanence of the services provided is not ensured and it is prejudicial to the user that he should be unable to use a function of the device if the provider decides to no longer provide the service of online storage of the contents to be rendered.